Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues 2025
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
In Vivo
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
In Vivo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues 2025
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit iiar on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies
Open Access

Medicinal Plants Used for Abdominal Discomfort – Information from Cancer Patients and Medical Students

SOEREN KLAUS BUENTZEL, JUTTA HUEBNER, JUDITH BUENTZEL and OLIVER MICKE
In Vivo September 2022, 36 (5) 2422-2433; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12976
SOEREN KLAUS BUENTZEL
1Klinik für Innere Medizin II, Hämatologie und Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
JUTTA HUEBNER
1Klinik für Innere Medizin II, Hämatologie und Onkologie, Universitätsklinikum Jena, Jena, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
JUDITH BUENTZEL
2Klinik für Hämatologie und Medizinische Onkologie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: judith.buentzel@med.uni-goettingen.de
OLIVER MICKE
3Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Radioonkologie, Franziskus-Hospital Bielefeld, Bielefeld, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: Abdominal discomfort during tumour therapy often leads to the use of phytotherapeutics from the field of folk medicine. What knowledge base do patients and young physicians have when they come across this phenomenon together? Patients and Methods: We conducted an online survey of 157 medical students and, in consultation, 125 patients according to a standardised algorithm about their knowledge and use of a list of given medicinal plants for the above-mentioned symptomatology. We previously created the list of traditional German medicinal plants taking into account the symptoms of bloating, fullness, diarrhoea, constipation, and nausea. Both data pools are presented descriptively, compared using principal component analysis, and student knowledge was subjected to network analysis. Results: As a median, patients know 9 medicinal plants and use 4 species. Students know 10 medicinal plants and use 5 species. The rate of non-users is 13.6% among patients and 11.4% among students. The plants used by both groups are ginger and mint, whereas patients also use camomile and fennel. The nearly coincident knowledge profile speaks of a common knowledge base – folk medicine. Network analysis illustrated that students stored their knowledge in symptom clusters. Conclusion: Patients with cancer and students are familiar with a similar canon of medicinal plants for the treatment of abdominal discomfort. Their common source is folk medicine. Targeted instructions on evidence-based phytotherapy are needed to improve students’ existing symptom-cluster-related knowledge.

Key Words:
  • Phytotherapy
  • self-medication
  • cancer patients
  • medical students
  • abdominal discomfort

Abdominal discomfort in cancer patients may be caused by the tumour or may be due to a secondary diagnosis/concomitant disease (1). Of 482,500 new cases in 2013, 112,580 had malignant tumours of the digestive tract [except the oesophagus: ICD-10 list C16-C26 (2)]. Relevant concomitant diagnoses include inflammation-related complaints (e.g., chronic inflammatory bowel disease), irritable bowel syndrome or functional dyspepsia.

For the patient, this consideration of the cause of the abdominal discomfort is initially not of importance. They have a feeling of fullness, pain of varying qualities (pressure, colic, tightness), flatulence, constipation, diarrhoea, or nausea. Secondary symptoms include malaise, loss of appetite, low mood, and a subjective loss of control over essential activities of the patient’s body. In addition, from the patient’s point of view, there is the social significance of these complaints: Additional stress is created; the affected person withdraws from social contacts and activities, even to the point of complete social isolation. On the other hand, patients in such phases feel very dependent on help from their environment. Personal performance is significantly reduced at work and during leisure time (3). A correlation between abdominal discomfort and decreased quality of life in affected individuals is well evidenced in gastroenterology (4, 5).

The doctor-patient relationship is also secondarily affected by abdominal discomfort. Some of those affected seek a paternalistic doctor and follow them. However, a large number feel misunderstood, pushed into the “psycho corner” and lose their compliance, and consequently their necessary adherence even in the oncological treatment. Physicians avoid talks about discomfort symptoms, based on their own uncertainty or the daily routine. Lay aetiological ideas about abdominal pain and tumours then gain ground, and complementary or even alternative treatment methods are sought (6).

Typical non-medical sources of information for patients include the internet, patient brochures, and word-of-mouth information (7). The latter in particular are fed by empirical medicine. Phytotherapy is one of the oldest forms of treatment in naturopathy and has been known since ancient times (8, 9). Gastrointestinal complaints are one of the main indications for the use of medicinal plants in Europe and elsewhere (10). The literature suggests that one third of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use by tumour patients is based on medicinal plants (11). The trend towards the use of complementary and alternative measures is increasing, and it is estimated that about 50% of all affected people use them (12).

The current S3 guideline on supportive care in oncology patients unfortunately does not currently have a separate section on abdominal discomfort in patients. Only related symptoms such as nausea and vomiting or therapy-associated diarrhoea are discussed in detail (13).

The aim of this study was to conduct a survey on the knowledge and use of medicinal plants for abdominal discomfort among German patients with cancer and medical school students. The main focus was on non-tumour-related complaints. Knowledge of the status quo is intended to facilitate conversation between stakeholders and professionals on the one hand, and to strengthen the foundation for practice-based student education in this area on the other.

Patients and Methods

Questionnaire. We developed a questionnaire, containing a TEM-hitlist of medicinal plants against defined symptoms of abdominal discomfort. We used the algorithm already described by our group (14, 15). To obtain this hitlist, we defined the relevant symptoms, and the type of remedy collections.

Symptom selection. Recently a British group (1) defined the following six typical abdominal symptoms as significant (percentage - symptom is a reason for general practitioner consultation) in their study of 16.4 million participants from GP practices in the UK: dysphagia (0.52%), flatulence (0.61%), abdominal pain (5.42%), bowel irregularity (0.65%), rectal bleeding (1.43%), and dyspepsia (3.15%). We focus our survey on the “hidden” symptoms of flatulence/feeling full, constipation/diarrhoea and nausea. Dysphagia was excluded as a symptom of the swallowing route.

Literature selection. On the basis of common phytotherapeutic literature (10 books for diarrhoea, nausea and constipation, 11 books for fullness and bloating) by various authors in the German language (layman literature, professional literature, plant identification books), we carried out a systematic survey of traditional knowledge on the use of medicinal plants for the above symptoms. For the book list used, see Table I.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Analysed German-language literature on phytotherapy (ordered by symptom).

Plant selection and list. We limited ourselves to plants that are known and used as medicinal plants in Central Europe. First, all usage references/recipes for the above symptoms in the selected books were recorded. A table of the frequency of mentioning in these books was set up, which is listed in Table II. As a result, a canon of thirteen medicinal herbs was created representing the most popular plants against abdominal discomfort in German folk medicine.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Multiple responses of medicinal plants per symptom.

Data collection.

Patient survey. The developed questionnaire recorded the knowledge and use of a medicinal plants (from the given list). Symptoms were assigned to plants and these were presented with pictures, so that recognition was also possible for patients when answering the anonymous questionnaire.

In terms of demographic data, only patient age, sex, and tumour diagnosis were recorded. The sheet was given by the Study Nurse to the patients during a tumour follow-up consultation for head and neck tumour, lymph node malignancies, and skin tumours. The nurse at the outpatient clinic was available for assistance. Period: 01/08/2020 to 30/09/2020.

Student survey. A questionnaire, structured analogously with respect to the plants, was programmed by us on the SoSci Survey platform and placed online. The invitation link was sent out via social media, and to students of the Otto-von-Guericke-University Magdeburg, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena and Jena University of Applied Sciences asking for participation. Here, we requested anonymous information on sex, education level and field of study. Additionally, the students had the option of free text responses for their associated indications of medicinal plants in the given canon. Period: 01/03/2020 to 30/04/2020.

The data of patient-participants were transferred to an MS Excel sheet, which was used for further analysis. SoSci Survey summarised the student-participant data as an MS Excel sheet.

Statistical methods. At first, a descriptive analysis was performed to determine demographic data, and the level of knowledge about the recorded plants and the frequency of their use by patients and students. After this descriptive analysis of the entire dataset, a detailed analysis of the knowledge and usage for the above-mentioned five leading symptoms (bloating, fullness, nausea, diarrhoea and constipation) was performed.

Principal component analysis. For comparing data, we resorted to an algorithm already presented by our group (16). The principal component analysis was used to compare response behaviour between our two groups of participants. The resulting heat maps (Heat Map Cluster Analysis) were used to illustrate the possible differences and similarities in knowledge and usage of medicinal herbs. We have used the free ClustVis software, which is available online, for this purpose (17).

Network analysis. The students’ free-text responses were subjected to network analysis. For this purpose, symptom complexes were defined out of the given answers (abdominal discomfort, sensitivities, upper respiratory tract and oral mucositis). The naming of a symptom from the complex led to the assignment of the described plant. The visualisation was performed using the program Easy Linavis via www.ezlinavis.dracor.org.

Further statistics. Demographic impact factors (age and sex) were analysed via univariate analysis. The information provided by the students was also screened for impact. The level of education was examined here as a possible determinant. Groups according to the impact factors were compared by independent Student’s t-test or Mantel-Haenszel chi squared test. Differences were described as significant if the p-value was <0.05.

Ethics. The survey was submitted to and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Jena University Medical Center (Reg. No. 2020-1866-Bef dated 31/07/2020). All the research was conducted in accordance with the currently valid version of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Results

Study population.

Participating cancer patients. The participating cancer patients suffered from different tumours: C01-C13 60 participants, C30-C32 43 participants, C44 12 participants, and C73 and C77 5 participants. A total of 125 patients (94 men, 31 women) were included. Their average age was 67.14±10.08 years. To prepare the impact analysis “age”, we demonstrated the age structure in Figure 1.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

The distribution of patients in the different age groups.

Participating students. A total of 190 fellow students participated (53 men, 129 women, 8 not specified). Of these, 174 studied human medicine, 2 dentistry and 14 other health sciences. A total of 72 students were in preclinical training at the time of the survey, 89 were in clinical semesters, 13 students were in their internship year, and 16 made no assignment. In the end, 157 interviews were included in the analysis.

Study results. The patients knew a median of 9 medicinal plants from the presented canon (range=2-13). They used a median of 4 of the plants mentioned (range=0-11). The proportion of non-users was 17/125 (13.6%). The students knew a median of 10 of the plants (range=0-13). They used a median of 5 plants (range=0-10). The proportion of non-users was 18/157 (11.4%). Figure 2 summarises these data and illustrates that there are no significant difference between the two groups.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Box plots of knowledge and usage of medicinal plants in patients and students. No significant difference was found between the two groups.

Knowledge of plants. Botanic knowledge is the base of plants’ use in nutrition and medicine. It is noteworthy, that patients and students knew the given canon. Only seven students reported that they know zero of the given herbs. However, there are some further differences. More than 90% of patients knew peppermint, chamomile, and fennel. In contrast, anise, bilberry, and rhubarb were the most known herbs among medical students. Table III summarises the numeric knowledge rates of participants regarding the hitlist plants. The remarkable different rankings in both groups are supported by the principal component analysis (PCA). The heat map in Figure 3 compares the knowledge regarding each plant among the students and patients. Students had a higher knowledge on flax, oak, anise, psyllium seeds and bloodroot. In contrast, fennel, rhubarb, ginger, caraway/cumin, peppermint, senna leaves, bilberry, and camomile were better known among the patients.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table III.

Knowledge of medicinal plants against abdominal discomfort.

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

Assessment of knowledge of individual medicinal plants using principal component analysis. The more red-brown the tones become, the more often a plant is recognized. Blue indicates little knowledge.

Use as medicinal plants. The reported use is representing the applicable knowledge regarding medicinal plants. Therefore, Table IV lists the usage of the different plants against abdominal discomfort. Here the ranking showed that patients and students had the same favourites – peppermint and chamomile. In Figure 4, the PCA-based heat map demonstrates the similar usage behavior of patients and students. But it also illustrates that in particular ginger and flax are used practically only by students. Some plants were practically not used by both groups, for example bloodroot.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table IV.

Usage of medicinal plants against abdominal discomfort.

Figure 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 4.

Assessment of the use of individual medicinal plants using principal component analysis. The more red-brown the tones become, the more often a plant is used. Blue indicates little usage.

The knowledge of plants not always correlated with their use. Correlation analysis (Pearson) showed a mean positive correlation in patients with r=0.525 at p<0.001. This relationship was not present in the medical students (r=0.09, p=0.249).

The ratio between knowledge and usage represents the application security within a reporting group. We observed a use-knowledge quotient among patients ranging from 0.716 for peppermint to 0.042 for oak. Students showed use-knowledge ratios ranging from 1.088 (camomile) to 0.024 (oak). Value >1 is only possible if participants have not marked a herb as known, but listed that they used the herb in daily life. Table V summarises in detail the medicinal plants and the quotient as a measure to estimate how often plants known to patients and medical students are also in use.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table V.

Medicinal plants of traditional medicine in German-speaking countries for the treatment of abdominal discomfort* (use-knowledge ratio per plant).

Applicable knowledge and supposed indications. Table VI presents the detailed knowledge and user rates for the different symptoms of abdominal discomfort. Patients used what they know: fennel against bloating and fullness, rhubarb against constipation, bilberry against diarrhoea, and peppermint against nausea. Medical students used the same herbs against bloating, fullness, and diarrhoea. Nausea was commonly treated with ginger, and flax was used against constipation. Furthermore, students knew the positive effects of anise against bloating, but did not use it.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table VI.

Usage of medicinal plants against abdominal discomfort.

Students’ knowledge could be described by analysing the free text answers in their survey. A total of 157 students named 265 supposed indications for the use of medicinal plants in relation to abdominal complaints, i.e., 1.68 “associated” indications were listed by each student. The awareness of the mentioned indication(s) for the use of a medicinal plant was distributed as follows: Fennel 53 (33.8%), flax 48 (30.6%), chamomile 39 (24.8%), psyllium seeds 31 (19.7%), anise 29 (18.5%), caraway/cumin 25 (15.9%), peppermint 19 (12.1%), ginger 13 (8.3%), rhubarb 5 (3.2%), bilberry 2 (1.3%), senna leaves 1 (0.6%), bloodroot 0, and oak 0.

The network analysis of free answers in Figure 5 also reveals that students were aware of plant clusters, e.g., camomile – peppermint, fennel – anise, peppermint – ginger. Other plants were more in use as individual substances including Bilberry, senna leaves, and bloodroot. The shown clusters are also presented in Table VI. The mentioned combinations of herbs are related to different symptoms.

Figure 5.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 5.

Network analysis of indication knowledge among students. The larger the node, the more indications per plant. The wider the axis, the more common the indications.

Influencing factors. Patients: In the determinant analysis, female sex was shown to have a positive influence on plant knowledge. There was no influence on the use of medicinal plants. Age had no influence on the answers. Detailed data are shown in Table VII.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table VII.

Factors affecting knowledge and usage of medicinal plants.

Students: Within medical school, the training section had no impact on the knowledge and use of medicinal plants.

Discussion

To our knowledge, the presented data are the first about self-medication against abdominal discomfort in the context of cancer and cancer treatment. People know plants, and only 13.6% of our tumour patients were not using herbs in the context of abdominal discomfort. Such data shows, the knowledge and use of medicinal herbs is an important part of CAM and have to be part of the patient-doctor-interactions. Furthermore, the syndrome of abdominal discomfort is considered to be one of the main symptoms that compromise quality of life and life satisfaction of patients. Because of the known psychological overlays, this applies to vulnerable groups such as patients with cancer in particular (18, 19).

CAM against abdominal discomfort. Nearly 90% of patient participants were using herbs in the case of abdominal discomfort. Probably the role of medicinal herbs is underestimated in the current literature about CAM among patients with cancer. All of our participants (patients as well as students) had a very high level of knowledge regarding herbs. Therefore, the high user rates were not a real surprise. However, they were in contrast to reports from the literature. About 40-50% of all patients with cancer in Germany seek and use complementary or alternative treatment approaches (7). One of the most frequently-mentioned therapeutic goals for using phytotherapy is to alleviate side effects of cancer therapy or symptoms related to the tumour (12). Phytotherapy is used only at rates <10%. The reason for this observation is unknown. Sometimes, medicinal herbs might not be reported, because patients do not classify application of herbal medicine in daily life (e.g., herbal teas) as CAM. Behavioural-psychological support, acupuncture, and moxibustion are well known CAM methods against abdominal discomfort (20-25). These (sometimes plant including) procedures are used especially in Southeast Asia. Wraps, washes, and especially massages are typical procedures in complementary care; specific phytotherapy also has a long tradition in some regions of the world (26, 27). Dietary measures, including probiotics, also occupy a separate position (28, 29).

To understand this hidden role of medicinal herbs in supportive care for patients with cancer, we have to reflect that phytotherapy generally involves the treatment of symptoms or diseases with plants, their parts or their ingredients.

In 2020, sales of typical phytopharmaceuticals in Germany amounted to 856 million Euros (excluding homoeopathy and anthroposophical preparations). Stomach and digestive products were the fourth-largest item, with sales of 128 million Euros. In addition to classic self-medication, there is the area of medically prescribed preparations that are taken by patients and for which they have to pay for themselves (30).

Plants against abdominal discomfort. We presented a first canon of herbs, which are traditionally used against abdominal discomfort in Germany. Peppermint, chamomile, and fennel are used in daily practice among our patients with cancer. Here, the basic pool of knowledge is folk medicine and their written remedies. This is in contrast to common CAM use in oncology. Normally, little is known about specific sources of CAM information and detailed indications (31).

To understand the specific role of medicinal herbs against abdominal discomfort, we focus on other medical cultures. Also referring to the unclear definition of symptoms – described above – Pasalar et al. collected the possible traditional Persian/Iranian medicinal plants (32), which we summarised again in Table VIII; there are some differences to our German canon. In Japanese Kampo medicine, there is also a number of defined plant mixtures (Table IX) that are part of traditional recipes and have proven pharmacological targets (33). Some frequently used plant mixtures are also known from the field of traditional Chinese herbal medicine. In a Systematic Review, a small effect was described from 27 randomised controlled trials on Si-Mo-Tang, but the study quality was very low (34). The situation is similar for the traditional Chinese formulation Tong-Xie-Yao-Fang (35). Other Southeast Asian cultures also have hidden recipes in folk medicine: Individual controlled studies are available from Korea, for example, on Samryungbaekchul-san (36). There are studies on the compound Padma Lax used in traditional Tibetan medicine, but the patient number is also very low with 61 patients (37) and 37 participants (38), so that no conclusions on efficacy should be drawn here either.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table VIII.

Medicinal plants of traditional Persian (Iranian) medicine for the treatment of abdominal discomfort (Pasalar et al.)

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table IX.

Medicinal plants of Kampo medicine for the treatment of gastrointestinal complaints (Tominaga et al. 2013)

In both traditional Persian medicine and Kampo medicine, the authors emphasise the lack of or insufficient data from clinical trials in the sense of evidence-based medicine. There is a similar situation for the presented folk medicine-based German canon. Regarding our list, only a few reviews and RCTs were identified. Thus, there is a controlled study on peppermint (as an oil) with quite a positive effect on functional abdominal symptoms, but tumour patients with their additional features were almost never considered as a study population (39). Camomile has been co-tested in the drug combination STW3 (Iberogast®) as a medicinal plant helping with abdominal discomfort (40), though individual studies are more available in the context of oral mucositis (14). For the combination of STW3 with Angelica archangelica L. (Medicinal angelica), Matricaria chamomilla L. (Camomile), Carum carvi L. (Caraway), Silybum marianum L. (Milk thistle), Melissae folium (Lemon balm), Menthae x piperitae L. (peppermint), Chelidonium L. (greater celandine), Glycyrrhiza glabra L. (liquorice), and Iberis amara L. (bitter candytuft), further randomised studies with clinical proof of efficacy are available (41). Overall, the effect is considered to be statistically significant, but not clinically significant (42). There are also individual reports for bloodroot (43) and cumin [both in our list (44)], as well as marjoram (43). We found no other recent clinical work on the topic at a Western setting.

Risk of self-medication. People know a lot of herbs and some traditional remedies, and thus our “median patient” knows 9 plants and uses 4 of them against abdominal discomfort. Looking at the canon of traditional European (German) plants, only a minority are likely to be actual phytopharmaceuticals, while the majority are used in teas, extracts, salads and other preparations. In no field of complementary medicine are dietetics and pharmacological effects likely to be so juxtaposed as in phytotherapy. It is precisely this situation that leads to a problem that is particularly explosive in patients with cancer– the interactions between basic treatment and self-prescribed complementary medicine. Conservative estimates suggest that this is likely to be a factor in 55% of oncology patients on CAM self-medication (45). Recently, Wolf and colleagues reported that in 37.5% of patients, these interactions between cancer therapy and self-medication are due to classical phytopharmaceuticals. In addition, in 28.7% of patient interactions between cancer therapy and medicinal plants occurs in the context of nutrition. Since >50% of patients do not report their self-medication, this figure alone results in a high number of unreported effects that need to be uncovered to prevent harm to the patient and to ensure effective therapy (46). The problem should be illustrated by an example: 70% of our patients are using peppermint against abdominal discomfort. Enhanced bowel activity will be a typical effect with its full consequences for any oral/enteral medication and/or nutrition.

Phytotherapy education of medical students. Medical Students know and use the same traditional herbs against abdominal symptoms. Despite their youth, they have a high level of knowledge in medical plants. Only in some fields they show to be more informed than their patients. Thus, they know ginger for treating nausea, or anise for treating bloating. But they are seldomly able to transfer this knowledge to their practice.

According to the data available here, the source of knowledge in both populations studied (students as well as patients) is currently likely to be folk medicine rather than university education (15). Figure 3, on the other hand, illustrates the necessary transfer of knowledge between the two groups. If the students know more, these plants can be used in a more targeted way. If students know less, their knowledge needs to be increased.

There is a characteristic gap in students’ answer profile. Network analysis is a valuable tool to document which symptom-cluster is associated with certain plants. Gaining an overview of the current knowledge of medical students is a good base for improving education on phytotherapy. Especially as the participants are not always able to describe the correct indication for a single medicinal plant. Bilberries are the most divergent example – all students (82.8%) know the plant, nearly nobody (1.3%) was able to tell the right indication. We have to bridge this gap. It should be an important task of further education at universities.

Depending on the generation, patients obtain their information from the internet or classic advice. Personal advice by family members, doctors and pharmacists will remain a base for our patients with cancer in the future too. From this point of view, determining the level of knowledge of young physicians is of particular importance. In the classic consultation situation, the young doctor then encounters unsettled patients who want to treat their hidden complaints with home remedies but do not want to disturb the tumour therapy (and the doctor). This situation can be improved using two approaches: First, the herbal consumed must be discussed in principle and repeatedly between the patient with cancer and physician (standard of communication). On the other hand, there is a need for professional knowledge on the part of medical professionals on issues related to phytotherapy and medicinal herb usage (medical education).

Knowledge of indications, interactions and closing the knowledge gap in terms of evidence-based medicine are necessary to ultimately lead to an improvement in complementary medicine care in the field of phytotherapy for patients with cancer. The recently published data on the quality of complementary medicine offered in German general teaching practices illustrates the significant problem of this issue (47).

Limitations of the study. To avoid over-interpretations of the presented results, it is necessary to discuss the limitation of the study: i) Abdominal discomfort is not clearly defined. Our canon of medicinal plants is limited to the hidden symptoms bloating, fullness, nausea, constipation and diarrhoea. Abdominal pain therapy is an additional major clinical problem. ii) We have used a barrier-free concept of study participation. Participants got name, picture and possible indications of the plants and were asked to mark knowledge and usage. Probably lower rates of active knowledge are realistic. iii) Abdominal discomfort of our patients was the result of cancer treatment or secondary diagnosis as inflammation or functional disturbances. Specific lower GI-cancer associated symptoms were not a subject of this study. iv) Participating patients were asked at one hospital. These answers of the group could be specific for the region of origin. v) Participating students came from different German universities. There is no standardised level of CAM education in medical studies in Germany. So, the answers of students could be locally specific too. vi) Both surveys were performed during Covid-19 pandemic. New media have got new role during this time. Easier accounts to web-based information offer new developing fields of CAM use.

Conclusion

Knowledge of the medicinal plants used is essential for oncologists. Patients with cancer use mint, camomile, fennel and ginger for abdominal discomfort; medical students tend to use ginger too. The existing broad knowledge from folk medicine should facilitate communication about the self-medication that actually takes place. To date, evidence-based knowledge is rare in phytotherapy of the discussed field. We observed that indications of plants are associated with a specific symptom-cluster. This already existing knowledge of medical students needs to be backed up with evidence-based knowledge in medical training.

Footnotes

  • Authors’ Contributions

    S.K.B. recruited participants. S.K.B., O. M. and J. B. wrote the manuscript. S. K. B. and J. B. did statistical and informatics analyses. O. M. and J. H. supervised the project. All Authors edited and reviewed the manuscript during the writing process.

  • Conflicts of Interest

    The Authors have no conflict of interest to declare relative to this study.

  • Received June 9, 2022.
  • Revision received June 21, 2022.
  • Accepted June 22, 2022.
  • Copyright © 2022, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 international license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0).

References

  1. ↵
    1. Herbert A,
    2. Rafiq M,
    3. Pham TM,
    4. Renzi C,
    5. Abel GA,
    6. Price S,
    7. Hamilton W,
    8. Petersen I and
    9. Lyratzopoulos G
    : Predictive values for different cancers and inflammatory bowel disease of 6 common abdominal symptoms among more than 1.9 million primary care patients in the UK: A cohort study. PLoS Med 18(8): e1003708, 2021. PMID: 34339405. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003708
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Robert Koch-Institut
    : Bericht zum Krebsgeschehen in Deutschland 2016, 2016. https://www.bundesgesundheitsministerium.de/fileadmin/Dateien/3_Downloads/K/Krebs/Krebsgeschehen_RKI.pdf [Last accessed on 21.06.2022]
  3. ↵
    1. Padilla GV
    : Psychological aspects of nutrition and cancer. Surg Clin North Am 66(6): 1121-1135, 1986. PMID: 3097843. DOI: 10.1016/s0039-6109(16)44078-8
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Keller CE,
    2. Wilcox CM,
    3. Gudleski GD,
    4. Branham S and
    5. Lackner JM
    : Beyond abdominal pain: Pain beliefs, pain affect, and distress as determinants of quality of life in patients with chronic pancreatitis. J Clin Gastroenterol 52(6): 563-568, 2018. PMID: 28858939. DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000000922
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Parkman HP,
    2. Wilson LA,
    3. Hasler WL,
    4. McCallum RW,
    5. Sarosiek I,
    6. Koch KL,
    7. Abell TL,
    8. Schey R,
    9. Kuo B,
    10. Snape WJ,
    11. Nguyen L,
    12. Farrugia G,
    13. Grover M,
    14. Clarke J,
    15. Miriel L,
    16. Tonascia J,
    17. Hamilton F and
    18. Pasricha PJ
    : Abdominal pain in patients with gastroparesis: Associations with gastroparesis symptoms, etiology of gastroparesis, gastric emptying, somatization, and quality of life. Dig Dis Sci 64(8): 2242-2255, 2019. PMID: 30852767. DOI: 10.1007/s10620-019-05522-9
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Welter S,
    2. Keinki C,
    3. Ahmadi E and
    4. Huebner J
    : Lay etiology, self-efficacy and patient activation among cancer patients. Cancer Invest 39(3): 219-228, 2021. PMID: 33475001. DOI: 10.1080/07357907.2021.1878528
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Huebner J,
    2. Micke O,
    3. Muecke R,
    4. Buentzel J,
    5. Prott FJ,
    6. Kleeberg U,
    7. Senf B,
    8. Muenstedt K and PRIO (Working Group Prevention and Integrative Oncology of the German Cancer Society)
    : User rate of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) of patients visiting a counseling facility for CAM of a German comprehensive cancer center. Anticancer Res 34(2): 943-948, 2014. PMID: 24511037.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Rätsch C
    : Heilpflanzen der Antike: Mythologie, Heilkunst und Anwendung. 1st ed. Aarau München, AT Verlag, 2014.
  9. ↵
    1. Popko L,
    2. Schneider UJ and
    3. Scholl R
    : Papyrus Ebers: Die größte Schriftrolle zur altägyptischen Heilkunst. 1st ed. Darmstadt, wbg Edition, 2021.
  10. ↵
    1. Wegmann U
    : Ethnobotanik im Prättigau Medizinalpflanzen - Nutzung und Wissen., 2013.
  11. ↵
    1. Molassiotis A,
    2. Fernández-Ortega P,
    3. Pud D,
    4. Ozden G,
    5. Scott JA,
    6. Panteli V,
    7. Margulies A,
    8. Browall M,
    9. Magri M,
    10. Selvekerova S,
    11. Madsen E,
    12. Milovics L,
    13. Bruyns I,
    14. Gudmundsdottir G,
    15. Hummerston S,
    16. Ahmad AM,
    17. Platin N,
    18. Kearney N and
    19. Patiraki E
    : Use of complementary and alternative medicine in cancer patients: a European survey. Ann Oncol 16(4): 655-663, 2005. PMID: 15699021. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdi110
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Micke O,
    2. Bruns F,
    3. Glatzel M,
    4. Schönekaes K,
    5. Micke P,
    6. Mücke R and
    7. Büntzel J
    : Predictive factors for the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in radiation oncology. Eur J Integr Med 1: 19-25, 2009. DOI: 10.1016/j.eujim.2009.02.001
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. ↵
    1. Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF)
    : S3-Leitlinie Supportive Therapie. AWMF Langversion 1.3: Registernummer: 032/054OL, 2020.
  14. ↵
    1. Buentzel J,
    2. Bauer C and
    3. Buentzel J
    : How to bridge the gap? European medical plants used for treating oral mucositis: on the search for evidence. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 146(4): 985-1001, 2020. PMID: 31955287. DOI: 10.1007/s00432-020-03124-x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Büntzel SK,
    2. Ritschel ML,
    3. Wurm-Kuczera R and
    4. Büntzel J
    : Indications of medical plants: what do medical students in Germany know? A cross-sectional study. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol, 2022. PMID: 35092483. DOI: 10.1007/s00432-022-03921-6
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Büntzel J,
    2. Bauer C,
    3. Kisters K and
    4. Büntzel J
    : Make experience visible: Possible new data management in phytotherapy. Trace Elements Electrolytes 38: 1-7, 2021. DOI: 10.5414/TEX01654
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  17. ↵
    1. Metsalu T and
    2. Vilo J
    : ClustVis: a web tool for visualizing clustering of multivariate data using Principal Component Analysis and heatmap. Nucleic Acids Res 43(W1): W566-W570, 2015. PMID: 25969447. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkv468
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Wang D and
    2. Fu J
    : Symptom clusters and quality of life in China patients with lung cancer undergoing chemotherapy. Afr Health Sci 14(1): 49-55, 2014. PMID: 26060457. DOI: 10.4314/ahs.v14i1.8
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Hwang KH,
    2. Cho OH and
    3. Yoo YS
    : Symptom clusters of ovarian cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, and their emotional status and quality of life. Eur J Oncol Nurs 21: 215-222, 2016. PMID: 26645947. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejon.2015.10.007
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Harris LA and
    2. Chang L
    : Irritable bowel syndrome: new and emerging therapies. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 22(2): 128-135, 2006. PMID: 16462168. DOI: 10.1097/01.mog.0000208461.84513.f3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Evans S,
    2. Yager E,
    3. Sutherland L and
    4. Downey M
    : Getting your grumble back. J Holist Nurs 36(3): 255-261, 2018. PMID: 27708119. DOI: 10.1177/0898010116672338
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Park JE,
    2. Lee SS,
    3. Lee MS,
    4. Choi SM and
    5. Ernst E
    : Adverse events of moxibustion: a systematic review. Complement Ther Med 18(5): 215-223, 2010. PMID: 21056845. DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2010.07.001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Chey WD,
    2. Maneerattaporn M and
    3. Saad R
    : Pharmacologic and complementary and alternative medicine therapies for irritable bowel syndrome. Gut Liver 5(3): 253-266, 2011. PMID: 21927652. DOI: 10.5009/gnl.2011.5.3.253
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Manheimer E,
    2. Cheng K,
    3. Wieland LS,
    4. Min LS,
    5. Shen X,
    6. Berman BM and
    7. Lao L
    : Acupuncture for treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (5): CD005111, 2012. PMID: 22592702. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005111.pub3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Yaklai K,
    2. Pattanakuhar S,
    3. Chattipakorn N and
    4. Chattipakorn SC
    : The role of acupuncture on the gut-brain-microbiota axis in irritable bowel syndrome. Am J Chin Med 49(2): 285-314, 2021. PMID: 33622207. DOI: 10.1142/S0192415X21500154
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Sinclair M
    : The use of abdominal massage to treat chronic constipation. J Bodyw Mov Ther 15(4): 436-445, 2011. PMID: 21943617. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2010.07.007
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Birimoglu Okuyan C and
    2. Bilgili N
    : Effect of abdominal massage on constipation and quality of life in older adults: A randomized controlled trial. Complement Ther Med 47: 102219, 2019. PMID: 31780015. DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2019.102219
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Marteau P
    : Therapy: Probiotic-enriched artichokes for abdominal discomfort. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 9(5): 251-252, 2012. PMID: 22429956. DOI: 10.1038/nrgastro.2012.49
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Pusceddu MM and
    2. Gareau MG
    : Visceral pain: gut microbiota, a new hope? J Biomed Sci 25(1): 73, 2018. PMID: 30309367. DOI: 10.1186/s12929-018-0476-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. STATISTA
    : OTC-Arzneimittel und Selbstmedikation. Statista, 2019. Available from: https://de.statista.com/statistik/studie/id/23076/dokument/otc-arzneimittel-und-selbstmedikation-statista-dossier/ [Last accessed on May 12, 2022]
  27. ↵
    1. Bauer F,
    2. Schmidt T,
    3. Eisfeld H,
    4. Dubois C,
    5. Kastrati K,
    6. Hochhaus A and
    7. Huebner J
    : Information needs and usage of complementary and alternative medicine in members of a German self-help group for gastrointestinal stroma tumours, sarcoma, and renal cancer. Complement Ther Med 41: 105-110, 2018. PMID: 30477825. DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2018.09.008
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Pasalar M,
    2. Nimrouzi M,
    3. Choopani R,
    4. Mosaddegh M,
    5. Kamalinejad M,
    6. Mohagheghzadeh A and
    7. Bagheri Lankarani K
    : Functional dyspepsia: A new approach from traditional Persian medicine. Avicenna J Phytomed 6(2): 165-174, 2016. PMID: 27222829.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Tominaga K and
    2. Arakawa T
    : Kampo medicines for gastrointestinal tract disorders: a review of basic science and clinical evidence and their future application. J Gastroenterol 48(4): 452-462, 2013. PMID: 23503839. DOI: 10.1007/s00535-013-0788-z
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. Wang C,
    2. Zhu M,
    3. Xia W,
    4. Jiang W and
    5. Li Y
    : Meta-analysis of traditional Chinese medicine in treating functional dyspepsia of liver-stomach disharmony syndrome. J Tradit Chin Med 32(4): 515-522, 2012. PMID: 23427381. DOI: 10.1016/s0254-6272(13)60063-1
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Bian Z,
    2. Wu T,
    3. Liu L,
    4. Miao J,
    5. Wong H,
    6. Song L and
    7. Sung JJ
    : Effectiveness of the Chinese herbal formula TongXieYaoFang for irritable bowel syndrome: a systematic review. J Altern Complement Med 12(4): 401-407, 2006. PMID: 16722791. DOI: 10.1089/acm.2006.12.401
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Lee JH,
    2. Kim JI,
    3. Baeg MK,
    4. Sunwoo YY,
    5. Do K,
    6. Lee JH,
    7. Kim HJ,
    8. Choi JS,
    9. Kim J,
    10. Seo CS,
    11. Shin HK,
    12. Ha H and
    13. Park TY
    : Effect of Samryungbaekchul-san combined with otilonium bromide on diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome: a pilot randomized controlled trial. J Clin Med 8(10): 1558, 2019. PMID: 31569833. DOI: 10.3390/jcm8101558
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Sallon S,
    2. Ben-Arye E,
    3. Davidson R,
    4. Shapiro H,
    5. Ginsberg G and
    6. Ligumsky M
    : A novel treatment for constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome using Padma Lax, a Tibetan herbal formula. Digestion 65(3): 161-171, 2002. PMID: 12138321. DOI: 10.1159/000064936
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    1. Meier R,
    2. Hengstler P,
    3. Weber F,
    4. Maurer H,
    5. Bommeli C and
    6. Brignoli R
    : The Tibetan herbal formula Padma Digestin in functional dyspepsia: an open-label study. Forsch Komplementmed 20 Suppl 2: 2-7, 2013. PMID: 23860105. DOI: 10.1159/000351086
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. Brierley SM and
    2. Kelber O
    : Use of natural products in gastrointestinal therapies. Curr Opin Pharmacol 11(6): 604-611, 2011. PMID: 21996284. DOI: 10.1016/j.coph.2011.09.007
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Melzer J,
    2. Rösch W,
    3. Reichling J,
    4. Brignoli R and
    5. Saller R
    : Meta-analysis: phytotherapy of functional dyspepsia with the herbal drug preparation STW 5 (Iberogast). Aliment Pharmacol Ther 20(11-12): 1279-1287, 2004. PMID: 15606389. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2004.02275.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. Kim YS,
    2. Kim JW,
    3. Ha NY,
    4. Kim J and
    5. Ryu HS
    : Herbal therapies in functional gastrointestinal disorders: a narrative review and clinical implication. Front Psychiatry 11: 601, 2020. PMID: 32754057. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00601
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. ↵
    1. Mounsey A,
    2. Barzin A and
    3. Rietz A
    : Functional dyspepsia: Evaluation and management. Am Fam Physician 101(2): 84-88, 2020. PMID: 31939638.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  39. ↵
    1. Huber R,
    2. Ditfurth AV,
    3. Amann F,
    4. Güthlin C,
    5. Rostock M,
    6. Trittler R,
    7. Kümmerer K and
    8. Merfort I
    : Tormentil for active ulcerative colitis: an open-label, dose-escalating study. J Clin Gastroenterol 41(9): 834-838, 2007. PMID: 17881930. DOI: 10.1097/MCG.0b013e31804b2173
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Rich G,
    2. Shah A,
    3. Koloski N,
    4. Funk P,
    5. Stracke B,
    6. Köhler S and
    7. Holtmann G
    : A randomized placebo-controlled trial on the effects of Menthacarin, a proprietary peppermint- and caraway-oil-preparation, on symptoms and quality of life in patients with functional dyspepsia. Neurogastroenterol Motil 29(11), 2017. PMID: 28695660. DOI: 10.1111/nmo.13132
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    1. Firkins R,
    2. Eisfeld H,
    3. Keinki C,
    4. Buentzel J,
    5. Hochhaus A,
    6. Schmidt T and
    7. Huebner J
    : The use of complementary and alternative medicine by patients in routine care and the risk of interactions. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 144(3): 551-557, 2018. PMID: 29356888. DOI: 10.1007/s00432-018-2587-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. ↵
    1. Wolf CPJG,
    2. Rachow T,
    3. Ernst T,
    4. Hochhaus A,
    5. Zomorodbakhsch B,
    6. Foller S,
    7. Rengsberger M,
    8. Hartmann M and
    9. Hübner J
    : Interactions in cancer treatment considering cancer therapy, concomitant medications, food, herbal medicine and other supplements. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 148(2): 461-473, 2022. PMID: 33864520. DOI: 10.1007/s00432-021-03625-3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. ↵
    1. Hübner J,
    2. Ciarlo G,
    3. Dubois C,
    4. Münstedt K,
    5. Micke O,
    6. Büntzel J,
    7. Klein M,
    8. Josfeld L and
    9. Keinki C
    : [Complementary and alternative medicine offers of teaching practices for general medicine]. Gesundheitswesen, 2022. PMID: 35016252. DOI: 10.1055/a-1690-6631
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

In Vivo: 36 (5)
In Vivo
Vol. 36, Issue 5
September-October 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on In Vivo.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Medicinal Plants Used for Abdominal Discomfort – Information from Cancer Patients and Medical Students
(Your Name) has sent you a message from In Vivo
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the In Vivo web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1 + 4 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Medicinal Plants Used for Abdominal Discomfort – Information from Cancer Patients and Medical Students
SOEREN KLAUS BUENTZEL, JUTTA HUEBNER, JUDITH BUENTZEL, OLIVER MICKE
In Vivo Sep 2022, 36 (5) 2422-2433; DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12976

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Medicinal Plants Used for Abdominal Discomfort – Information from Cancer Patients and Medical Students
SOEREN KLAUS BUENTZEL, JUTTA HUEBNER, JUDITH BUENTZEL, OLIVER MICKE
In Vivo Sep 2022, 36 (5) 2422-2433; DOI: 10.21873/invivo.12976
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Side-effects of Phytotherapeutics in Cancer Care - A Review of Inconsistencies in National and International Databases
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Validation of the Chick Chorioallantoic Membrane (CAM) Model for Biocompatibility Analysis of Biomaterials in the Context of the 3R-cascade: A Pilot Study
  • Immersive Virtual Reality for Reducing Intraoperative Pain: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
  • First Experiences of Pilot Clinical Studies on Boron Neutron Capture Therapy for Recurrent Gastrointestinal Cancers Using an Intravenous Injection of 10BPA
Show more Clinical Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Phytotherapy
  • self-medication
  • cancer patients
  • medical students
  • abdominal discomfort
In Vivo

© 2025 In Vivo

Powered by HighWire